Sūtra 2.2.10 (Mark of Space)

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration, Word-for-word and English translation of Vaiśeṣika sūtra 2.2.10:

इत इदमिति यतस्तद्दिश्यं लिङ्गम् ॥ २.२.१० ॥

ita idamiti yatastaddiśyaṃ liṅgam || 2.2.10 ||

itaḥ—from this; idam—this; iti—such; yataḥ—whence; tat—that; diśyam—relating to Space; liṅgam—mark.

10.That which gives rise to such (cognition and usage) as “This (is remote, etc.) from this,”—(the same is) the mark of Space.

Commentary: The Upaskāra of Śaṅkara Miśra:

(English rendering of Śaṅkara Miśra’s commentary called Upaskāra from the 15th century)

Having finished the section on the mark of Time, and going to begin the section on the mark of Space, lie says:

[Read sūtra 2.2.10 above]

‘Diśyam’—that which belongs to Space, i.e., is the mark of the inference of Space. The meaning is this: ‘Space’ is that substance ‘from which,’ in respect of two simultaneously existing bodies which are also fixed in (direction) and place, ‘such’ cognition and usage arise that ‘this,’ i.e., the ground or substratum of the conjunctions of a comparitively large number of conjoint things, is prior ‘to,’ (other than or distinct from) this i.e., the substratum of the conjunctions of a comparatively small number of conjoint things, and also that ‘this,’ i.e., the substratum of the comparative smallness in number of the conjunctions of the conjoint, is ‘posterior’ to ‘this,’ i.e., the substratum of the comparative largeness in number of the conjunctions of the conjoint. For, without the existence of such a substance, there is no other means of establishing a comparatively large or small number of the conjunctions of the conjoint in the two bodies; nor, without such establishment, can there be any particular or concrete understanding about them respectively; nor, without such understanding, can Priority and Posteriority arise; nor, without their appearance, can there be concrete cognition and usage about them.

It cannot be said, “Let Time be the means also of establishing the conjunctions. What is the use of another Substance?” For Time is proved only as the means of establishing constant or unchangeable actions. If, on the contrary, it is supposed to be the means of establishing the inconstant or changing property of Remoteness, then it would establish the colouring of the paste of the saffron of Kāśmira (Cashmere) on the breasts of the women of Karṇāta (the Carnatic). The same will be the implication if Ether and Soul also are similarly made to be the means of communicating the property of Remoteness. Whereas Space being proved only as the invariable means of communicating the property of Remoteness, there is no such absurd implication. In this way Space, which establishes conjunctions, is really separate from Time, which establishes actions.

Moreover, these cognitions, namely “This is east of that,” “This is south of that,” “This is west of that,” “This is north of that,” “This is south-east of that,” This is south-west of that,” “This is northwest of that,” “This is north-east of that,” “This is below that,” “This is above that,”—are brought together by the statement “This from this,” because it is not possible for these cognitions to have another occasional or efficient cause- Further, Time establishes external conditions or upādhis which are constant, while Space establishes external conditions or upādhis which are not constant. For, when one thing is ‘present’ (in Time) with reference to another thing, that other thing also is ‘present’ with reference to the former: but in the case of the external condition or upādhi of Space, there is no such rule or fixity, because that which is east in relation to a person, the very same sometime becomes west in relation to the same person. The same is to be observed with regard to north, etc., also. The direction or quarter which is nearer to the mountain whereon the sun rises, with reference to another direction, is east in relation to the latter; the direction which is nearer to the mountain whereon the sun sets, with reference to another direction, is west in relation to the latter. Nearness, again, is the fewness of the conjunctions of the conjoint; and these conjunctions with the sun, whether they be a few or many, are to be established by Space. In like manner, the direction, which is determined by the portion of Space falling on the left of a person facing towards east, is north; the direction determined by the right division of such a person, is south; while rightness and leftness are particular ‘classes’ residing in the constituent parts of the body. The direction, which is the support of the conjunction which is produced by an act of which Weight is the nou-combinative cause, is below; and the direction, which is the support of the conjunction which is produced by the conjunction of Soul possessing adṛṣṭam (invisble-consequences of conduct) or by the action of fire, is above. In this way, from their reference as east, etc., they are also otherwise referred to, as in the statement, “Directions are ten in number, as marked out by their being presided over by Indra, Agni, Yama, Nirṛta, Varuṇa Vāyu, Soma, Īśāna, Nāga, and Brahmā.”—10.